Navigating power in conservation

Author:

Shackleton Ross T.12ORCID,Walters Gretchen13ORCID,Bluwstein Jevgeniy45ORCID,Djoudi Houria6ORCID,Fritz Livia78ORCID,Lafaye de Micheaux Flore19ORCID,Loloum Tristan110ORCID,Nguyen Van Thi Hai111ORCID,Rann Andriamahefazafy Mialy112ORCID,Sithole Samantha S.1ORCID,Kull Christian A.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Geography and Sustainability University of Lausanne Lausanne Switzerland

2. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest Snow and Landscape Research Birmensdorf Switzerland

3. Department of Anthropology University College London London UK

4. Department of Geosciences University of Fribourg Fribourg Switzerland

5. Institute of Social Anthropology University of Bern Bern Switzerland

6. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR)‐World Agroforestry (ICRAF) Jalan CIFOR Bogor Bogor Barat Indonesia

7. Laboratory for Human‐Environment Relations of Urban Systems École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) Lausanne Switzerland

8. School of Business and Social Sciences Aarhus University Aarhus Denmark

9. International Union for Conservation of Nature Gland Switzerland

10. School of Social Work University of Applied Sciences and Arts Delémont Western Switzerland Switzerland

11. Wyss Academy for Nature at the University of Bern Bern Switzerland

12. Geneva Science‐Policy Interface University of Geneva Geneva Switzerland

Abstract

AbstractConservation research and practice are increasingly engaging with people and drawing on social sciences to improve environmental governance. In doing so, conservation engages with power in many ways, often implicitly. Conservation scientists and practitioners exercise power when dealing with species, people and the environment, and increasingly they are trying to address power relations to ensure effective conservation outcomes (guiding decision‐making, understanding conflict, ensuring just policy and management outcomes). However, engagement with power in conservation is often limited or misguided. To address challenges associated with power in conservation, we introduce the four dominant approaches to analyzing power to conservation scientists and practitioners who are less familiar with social theories of power. These include actor‐centered, institutional, structural, and, discursive/governmental power. To complement these more common framings of power, we also discuss further approaches, notably non‐human and Indigenous perspectives. We illustrate how power operates at different scales and in different contexts, and provide six guiding principles for better consideration of power in conservation research and practice. These include: (1) considering scales and spaces in decision‐making, (2) clarifying underlying values and assumptions of actions, (3) recognizing conflicts as manifestations of power dynamics, (4) analyzing who wins and loses in conservation, (5) accounting for power relations in participatory schemes, and, (6) assessing the right to intervene and the consequences of interventions. We hope that a deeper engagement with social theories of power can make conservation and environmental management more effective and just while also improving transdisciplinary research and practice.

Funder

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Nature and Landscape Conservation,Environmental Science (miscellaneous),Ecology,Global and Planetary Change

Cited by 16 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3